JAYANTILAL DAMJIBHAI SONI Vs. DIRECTOR OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition challenges notice dt. 4th Aug., 2000 (Annex. 'B'), issued to one M/s Jalaram Theatre, Maharshi Arvind Marg, Junagadh, under Section 158BC of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act'). Six petitioners have challenged the action of the respondent authority of issuing the impugned notice on the basis of the fact that the petitioners are the co -owners who owned a building named Jalaram Theatre (building). It is the say of the petitioners that the building had been rented out on a monthly rent of Rs. 6,000 in 1971 (subsequently raised to Rs. 8,000) to a firm named M/s Jayshree Talkies (Jayshree). It is further averred by the petitioners that the petitioners and /or relatives of the petitioners are in no way related to the partners of Jayshree which is carrying on business of exhibition of films in the building.

(2.) IT appears that search action under Section 132 of the Act took place on 3rd Sept., 1998, at the premises where Jayshree is running the business of exhibiting the films. Admittedly the warrant of authorisation for conducting the search has been issued in the name of 'partners of Jalaram Theatre/Jayshree Talkies'. Based on the aforesaid action the impugned notice has been issued in the name of M/s Jalaram Theatre.

(3.) HEARD Mr. Varun Patel for Mr. S.N. Soparkar, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners. The learned advocate, after reiterating the facts, contended that Section 158BC of the Act entitled an AO to issue notice for filing a return in the prescribed form in case of a person who had been searched under Section 132 of the Act but as there was no entity in the name and style of M/s Jalaram Theatre the petitioners could not be called upon to furnish such return of income for the block period by treating the petitioners as partners of M/s Jalaram Theatre.